Chairman's Desk

JD Vance may lose Republicans the White House

“One day you’re cock of the walk, the next a feather duster.”

 A politician must have cooked up this brutally cruel expression. After all, it is the perfect encapsulation of public life. Its vicissitudes. The hard, immutable fact that it is fleeting. For those who sacrifice so much to serve, this truth is painfully evident.

As I watched the astonishingly rapid turn of the spotlight towards Kamala Harris, the Democratic Party’s presumptive presidential nominee, and away from Joe Biden, I couldn’t help but be reminded of this.

But this reality also brought me back to the principle behind it: that “events” (as Harold Macmillan famously observed) are the real drivers of political life. And how it holds true even for the president of the United States.

In recent weeks, “events” initially appeared overwhelmingly favourable to Joe Biden’s political rivals. The failed assassination of Donald Trump was a great rallying cry for Republicans. Trump seemed to be able to quickly coalesce a party previously split between diehard zealots and moderates into one; building a coalition stronger, more determined than ever. And it was in the context of this fervour that Trump revealed Ohio Senator J.D. Vance as his running mate. A man who opined that President Biden’s “rhetoric” was directly responsible for the attempt on Trump’s life.

Then, it seemed only right to anoint an heir, one that would ensure the continuation of the MAGA legacy even after Trump had exited stage left. The “attack dog” who would gin up the base and ensure that base turned out on election day in a campaign, as I’ve written before, that wasn’t about persuasion but about turnout. Clearly, the tide was coming in and the Republicans only needed to ride it.

And then, the axiom “whoever speaks first loses” reared its ugly head and “events” quickly illustrated Vance’s selection was a grave, potentially fatal, mistake.

I’ll leave it to other pundits to divine his eclectic, ideologically elastic biography. My point is much more straightforward. Simply put, he is the wrong tool for the job, the proverbial knife for what is now a gunfight.

Events, especially those of historic significance, are never static — they multiply. And with Kamala Harris’s ascendance to the top of the Democratic ticket (Biden is the first eligible presidential incumbent since LBJ to opt-out), that “fight” has significantly shifted. Because now, the Democrats are building a movement. What was a rematch is now a race.

And in a contest that will hinge on turnout, Harris has demonstrated her prowess in the most critical arena for success — mobilization. Beyond her record fundraising efforts, the Vice President has already excited and motivated key Democratic cohorts, including African American women who have long been considered the backbone of the Democratic Party and younger voters who were discontent with President Biden’s record.

Her recent speech to more than 6,000 members of the historically African American Zeta Phi Beta Sorority and sudden embrace of Gen Z-focused social media trends illustrate a campaign that is going to use a different playbook — with a goal of exciting those groups.

Vance, suffice it to say, might well run-up the score in red states, but he will do next to nothing to turn the Trump-curious into Trump voters. People who support Vance already support Trump. His candidacy is not a growth proposition, it is a consolidation effort. Moreover, it’s worth noting that two white males at the top of the GOP ticket are woefully unsuited to take on a woman of colour.

And so, as Harris works to make the Biden campaign her own, to make room for the thousands upon thousands of Americans she has excited and animated, she holds an additional ace: the ability to make a far more strategically sound VP pick — one that will meaningfully expand her support in the key swing states she must win.

From where I sit, you would be well-advised to strap on your seatbelts for this one and all the events that are sure to come between now and election day.

This article first appeared in Toronto Star on July 29, 2024.

Read More